Opinion
KA 01-00654
November 15, 2002.
Appeal from a judgment of Onondaga County Court (Fahey, J.), entered February 15, 2001, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of scheme to defraud in the first degree.
FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (GERALD T. BARTH OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (VICTORIA M. ANTHONY OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., GREEN, SCUDDER, BURNS, AND GORSKI, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum:
In appeal No. 1, defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of scheme to defraud in the first degree (Penal Law § 190.65 [b]). In appeal Nos. 2 and 3, defendant appeals from judgments convicting him upon his pleas of guilty of grand larceny in the third degree (§ 155.35). Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court properly imposed an enhanced sentence based on his failure to comply with the condition in the plea agreement in appeal No. 1 that he not commit any new crimes between the time of entry of the plea and the subsequent sentencing ( see People v. Parker, 271 A.D.2d 63, 69, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 967). Further, the court examined the grand jury minutes underlying the indictments on the new charges against defendant and thus conducted a sufficient inquiry to determine "the existence of a legitimate basis" for the new charges ( People v. Outley, 80 N.Y.2d 702, 713; see People v. Huffman, 288 A.D.2d 907, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 755). Also contrary to the contention of defendant, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty pleas without conducting a hearing ( see generally People v. Peavy, 225 A.D.2d 1082, 1083, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 883).